View
2
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
1
© Engineering Safety Consultants Limited Page 1
IET Code of Practice: Competence for Safety Related Systems Practitioners
Ron BellEngineering Safety Consultants Ltd
ron.bell@esc.uk.netwww.esc.uk.net©
© Engineering Safety Consultants Limited Page 2
ESC IET Code of Practice
• Guidance provided by the IET in collaboration with HSE (Both logos on back cover)
• Published in December 2016
• www.theiet.org/standards
2
© Engineering Safety Consultants Limited Page 3
©
ESC IET Code of Practice
Market environment
HSE Delivery Guides
Competence requirements in standards
IET Code of Practice: Competence for Safety Related Systems Practitioners
Questions and discussion
Market Environment
Market environment
HSE Delivery Guides
Competence requirements in standards
IET Code of Practice: Competence for Safety Related Systems Practitioners
Questions and discussion
ESC
5
Aviation: = £245,000,000
Site operators(compensation claims): = £625,000,000
Comp Authority & Gov interventions = £15,000,000
Environmental impact on water supplies = £2,000,000
Emergency response = £7,000,000
Overall quantifiable costs ….by sector
Buncefield: Economic impact
Total = £894,000,000
Buncefield explosion:Initial Report findings
Improvements to maintaining the primary containment include: Electronic monitoring of tanks ….and associated
alarms that warn of abnormal conditions;
The detection of flammable vapours.........
The response to the detection of abnormal conditions…..
The recording of monitoring, detection and alarm systems …….and their availability
Active & managed safety measures Functional safety!
6
Buncefield explosion:
1. Systematic safety integrity level requirements2. Protecting against loss of primary containment
using high integrity systems3. Engineering against escalation of loss of primary
containment4. Engineering against escalation of loss of tertiary
containment5. Operating with high reliability organisations6. Delivering high performance through culture and
leadership
Investigation Board recommendations on the design and operation of fuel storage sites….key groupings
Increasing dependence on safety critical systems to achieve Target Risk levels
Increasing need to justify that you have achieved adequate levels of safetybasis
Safety Regulators using international standards as of what is reasonable (“accepted good practice”)
Increasing formality of safety culture, management of functional safety, competence of the organisation and personal competence
Increasing interest in management of legacy systems Business reputation in relation to safety a key business
driver
Market Environment: SummaryESC
7
Competence requirements in standards
Market environment
HSE Delivery Guides
Competence requirements in standards
IET Code of Practice: Competence for Safety Related Systems Practitioners
Questions and discussion
ESC
Legal Requirements
Health & Safety at Work etc. Act 1974
The Management of Health & Safety at Work Regulations 1999
Control of Major Accident Hazards (COMAH) Regulations 2015
Dangerous Substances & Explosive Atmospheres (DSEAR)
The Offshore Installations (Offshore Safety Directive) (Safety Case etc.) Regulations 2015
8
COMAH Competent Authority Delivery Guides (Rolled out in 2015)
Inspection of Electrical, Control and Instrumentation (EC&I) Systems at COMAH Establishments
The EC & I Delivery Guide: Describes how the COMAH Competent Authority (CA) inspects
Electrical, Control and Instrumentation (EC&I) aspects of control of major hazards at COMAH sites.
Includes the benchmark standards that are used to assess the way Operators manage risk
Whilst aimed at HSE EC&I inspectors, the guide will be useful to Operators in managing risk in relation to major accident hazards and preparing for Competent Authority inspections.
Not all of the benchmark standards contained in the guide are necessarily applicable at every establishment. The Operator should already be aware of the hazards and risks at their establishment and hence which benchmark standards are applicable.
Delivery Guide: Electrical, Control and Instrumentation (EC&I) Systems at COMAH Establishments
9
Failure to control process conditions and the risks from electrical installations and equipment have been the main or underlying cause in many major accidents both in the UK and abroad including Buncefield and BP Texas City.
HSE research into the causation of major accidents and incidents indicates that failure to adequately control process conditions, especially during normal operations, is responsible for the loss of containment of hazardous substances.
Justification for the EC&I Delivery Guide (Competent Authority Statement)
Inspection of Electrical, Control and Instrumentation (EC&I) Systems at COMAH Establishments
EC&I Inspection process will address one or more of the following topics in order to assess Operator risk management performance against relevant good practice: Hazard and risk assessment; Specification, design and engineering; Operator maintenance;
Above topic areas will need to be underpinned by: Competent people; An effective Safety Management System
10
Inspection of Electrical, Control and Instrumentation (EC&I) Systems at COMAH Establishments
ScopeFunctional safety;Explosive atmospheres, and;Electrical power systems.
Functional Safety is concerned with the management, design, installation, operation and maintenance instrumented process safety systems that reduce the risk of a major accident. Such systems include: Process control system; Safety instrumented systems (SISs); Alarm systems.
HSE position on "good practice" & Functional Safety
The general benchmark of good practice is BS EN 61508 -"Functional safety of electrical, electronic and programmable electronic safety related systems".
BS EN 61508 has been used as the basis for application-specific standards such as: BS EN 61511: process industry
BS EN 62061: machinery
BS EN 61513: nuclear power plants BS EN 61511, "Functional safety - Safety instrumented systems for
the process industry sector", is the benchmark standard for the management of functional safety in the process industries.
11
Inspection of Electrical, Control and Instrumentation (EC&I) Systems at COMAH Establishments
Operator Performance Rating: HSE will assess duty holder performance on a range of factors these include: The degree of compliance inspection on topics covering technical
standards, major hazard risk control systems and cross-cutting issues such as leadership, competence and workforce engagement;
The extent of non-compliance issues raised; Enforcement history, including enforcement notices and
prosecution; Incident data such as formal RIDDOR reports; ……………………………….. …………………………………
Inspection of Electrical, Control and Instrumentation (EC&I) Systems at COMAH Establishments
Performance Rating:
Operator will be given a performance rating using the criteria set out in the Table below for each of the EC&I topic areas based on the outcome of the inspection and relevant evidence from previous inspections.
The performance score will be communicated to the Operator.
The performance score will be available under a Freedom Of Information request.
12
Inspection of Electrical, Control and Instrumentation (EC&I) Systems at COMAH Establishments
Performance Rating:
Performance Assessment60 50 40 30 20 10
Unacceptable Very Poor
Poor Broadly Compliant
Fully Compliant /
Good
Exemplary
Performance Standards defined by HSE and the COMAH Competent Authority
Inspection of Electrical, Control and Instrumentation (EC&I) Systems at COMAH Establishments
Operator Performance Rating:
The performance score reflects the duty holders degree of compliance on the specific issue being inspected and is based on HSEs Enforcement Management Model’s risk gap and expressed as a numerical value.
Scores of 30, 40, 50 or 60 against individual inspection topics are evidence of a risk gap.
HSE will consider the nature and extent of the risk gap, including the underlying causes, in judging the duty holders overall performance.
13
Inspection of Electrical, Control and Instrumentation (EC&I) Systems at COMAH Establishments
Enforcement Management Model Risk GapExtreme Substantial Moderate Nominal None None
Topic Performance Score60 50 40 30 20 10
Unacceptable Very Poor Poor Broadly Compliant
Fully Compliant /
Good
Exemplary
Enforcement Management Initial Enforcement Expectation Prosecution / Enforcement
Notice
Enforcement Notice /Letter
Enforcement Notice /Letter
Letter / Verbal
Warning
None None
Inspection of Electrical, Control and Instrumentation (EC&I) Systems at COMAH Establishments
Enforcement Management Model Risk GapExtreme Substantial Moderate Nominal None None
Topic Performance Score60 50 40 30 20 10
Unacceptable Very Poor Poor Broadly Compliant
Fully Compliant /
Good
Exemplary
Enforcement Management Initial Enforcement Expectation Prosecution / Enforcement
Notice
Enforcement Notice /Letter
Enforcement Notice /Letter
Letter / Verbal
Warning
None None
14
Delivery Guides provide a basis for the Competence Authority to make objective judgements which is open to the Operator
Operators should be aware of the proposed approach from the Competent Authority
Key benchmark standard for functional safety in the process sector is IEC 61511 & IEC 61508
Compliance with the benchmark standards is the basis good practice in the achievement of functional safety.
Evidence of adequate Management of Functional Safety including competence of those having responsibilities for functional safety is high priority for Competent Authority inspections
HSE Delivery Guides: SummaryESC
ESC
Market environment
HSE Delivery Guides
Competence requirements in standards
IET Code of Practice: Competence for Safety Related Systems Practitioners
Questions and discussion
Competence requirements in standards
15
Compliance to IEC 61511Hazard & Risk Analysis
Allocation of safety functions to protection layers
Installation , commissioning & validation
Operation & maintenance
Modification
Decommissioning
Design & engineering of other risk
reduction measures
Safety requirements specification for the SIS
Design & engineering of the SIS
Man
agem
ent o
f Fun
ctio
nal S
afet
y &
Fun
ctio
nal
Safe
ty A
sses
smen
t & A
uditi
ng
Safe
ty li
fecy
cle
stru
ctur
e &
pla
nnin
g
Persons, departments or organizations involved in SIS safety life-cycle activities shall be competent to carry out the activities for which they are accountable.
IEC 615011-1
16
The following items shall be addressed and documented when considering the competence of persons, departments, organizations or other units involved in SIS safety life-cycle activities: engineering knowledge, training and experience appropriate to the process
application; engineering knowledge, training and experience appropriate to the
applicable technology used (e.g., electrical, electronic or programmable electronic);
engineering knowledge, training and experience appropriate to the sensors and final elements;
safety engineering knowledge (e.g., process safety analysis); knowledge of the legal and regulatory functional safety requirements; adequate management and leadership skills appropriate to their role in the
SIS safety life-cycle activities; understanding of the potential consequence of an event; the SIL of the SIF; the novelty and complexity of the application and the technology.
Requirements in IEC 61511-1
The appropriateness of competence shall be considered in relation to the particular application, taking into account all relevant factors including:
the responsibilities of the person; the level of supervision required; the potential consequences in the event of failure; the safety integrity levels of the E/E/PE safety-related; the novelty of the design, design procedures or application; previous experience and its relevance to the specific duties to
be performed and the technology being employed ; the type of competence appropriate to the circumstances (for
example qualifications, experience, relevant training and subsequent practice, and leadership and decision-making abilities);
…………………………………………………..etc
Requirements in IEC 61508-1
17
A procedure shall be in place to manage competence of all those involved in the SIS life cycle. Periodic assessments shall be carried out to document the competence of individuals against the activities they are performing and on change of an individual within a role.
Competence Management System (CMS) System
Requirements in IEC 61511-1
ESC Revision of IEC 61508: Overview Competence
Competence Management
Systems (CMS)
Aimed at setting up and managing a competence
scheme within an organisation
Individual and Team Competence
Aimed at specifying and assessing individual
competence
Management of competence and the need for competence criteria are necessary to achieve competence within an organisation
ESC
18
Competence
The achievement of competence should be addressed at:1. Organisation level: Effective Competence Management
Systems (CMS) Managing competence for safety-related systems- Part 1: Key
Guidance. First published 2007. Managing competence for safety-related systems- Part 2:
Supplementary Material. First published 2007.
2. Personal & Team level: Individual and Team Competence to undertake the defined activities and tasks within those activities.
IET Code of Practice: Competence for Safety Related Systems Practitioners
ESC
ESC
Market environment
HSE Delivery Guides
Competence requirements in standards
IET Code of Practice: Competence for Safety Related Systems Practitioners
Questions and discussion
Competence requirements in standards
19
ESC IET Code of Practice
• Guidance provided by the IET in collaboration with HSE (Both logos on back cover)
• Published in December 2016
• www.theiet.org/standards
IET Competence model
T#1
T#2
T#3
S#1
S #2
S #3
ActivityAll the Tasks in an Activity require specific knowledge, understanding and skills, which are expressed as a set of Task-based competencies
An Activity may also require knowledge, skills and personal qualities that are not directly related to specific Tasks and these are expressed as Supporting Competencies.
ESC
20
Competence comprises several generic components which are: 1. Knowledge (Know what): E.g. Sector knowledge2. Understanding (Know why): E.g. Principles of Safety and Risk3. Personal Qualities (Attitudes & Behaviours): E.g. Personal
integrity; Team player4. Skills (Know how); E.g. Technical skills (Hazard Analysis,
Report Writing); The above four generic components should be
addressed in defining the competencies within an Activity.
Experience is fundamental in the gaining of competence with respect to the above generic competence components.
ESC Activity Competence Profile
All the Tasks in an Activity require specific knowledge, understanding and skills, which are expressed as a set of Task-based competencies.
In addition, an Activity may also require knowledge, skills and personal qualities that are not directly related to specific Tasks and these are expressed as Supporting Competencies.
Supporting Competencies such as “effective communication” may be required for multiple activities.
IET Code of PracticeCompetenceESC
21
ESC
Level 1: Someone with Level 1 competence in a defined task-based or supporting competency has sufficient knowledge and understanding of good practice to be able to apply those competencies without placing an excessive burden on the more competent safety practitioner who is responsible for supervising their work. [Shortened version]
Level 2: Someone with Level 2 competence in a defined task-based or supporting competency has sufficient knowledge and understanding of good practice, and has the demonstrated experience, to be able to apply those competencies without the need for supervision. [Shortened version]
• Level 3: Someone with Level 3 competence in a defined task-based or supporting competency has sufficient understanding of why things are done in certain ways and has the sufficient managerial skills to be able to take overall responsibility for the performance of a task or activity. They will be familiar with the ways in which systems, and previous safety management systems, have failed in the past. [Shortened version]
IET Code of Practice defines three levels of Competence
Levels of Competence
Activity Competence Profile
Competence Level T1 T2 T3 SC1 SC2Level 3
Level 2
Level 1
An example of an Activity Competence profile when three Levels of competence have been defined
ESC
22
Competence Level T1 T2 T3 SC1 SC2Level 3Level 2Level 1
Other competence management systems may define these competence levels differently. However, even if different definitions are used, the rest of the guidance contained within this Code of Practice remains relevant.
It is even possible to specify task-based and supporting competencies for a given activity without adopting the concept of competence levels. Again, the guidance contained within the rest of this Code of Practice will still remain relevant.
Two important statements from the Code of Practice
Activity Competence ProfileESC
Competence Level T1 T2 T3 SC1 SC2Level 3Level 2Level 1
With respect to the adoption of three Competence Levels
In the first instance focus on developing Competence Criteria for the specific Activity (No competence levels);
The adoption of the three Levels of Competence may be advantageous when there are many identical Activities within the organisation. The key issue is whether they are identical!
Activity Competence ProfileESC
23
Step 1: Define the Organisational roles and activities
Key steps in determining competence
Step 2: Specify the competencies required for each Task within the defined Activity (I.e. the Activity competence profile)
Step 3: Assess the competencies of the person relevant to each Task within the defined Activity
Step 4: Compare the specified competencies required for each Task within the Activity with the competencies of the person relevant to each Task within the Activity. This comparison will facilitate an objective judgement to be made as to whether the person is competent to undertake the defined Task within the Activity.
ESC
Activity Competence Profile
Competence Level
T1 T2 T3 SC1 SC2
Level 3
Level 2
Level 1
ESC
Required Profile
Competence Level
T1 T2 T3 SC1 SC2
Level 3
Level 2
Level 1
Assessed Person’s Profile
Compare Activity Profiles
24
Competence criteria are provided for the following example safety-related activities:
corporate functional safety management; project safety assurance management; safety-related system maintenance and modification; safety-related system or services procurement; independent safety assessment; safety hazard and risk analysis; safety requirements specification; safety validation; safety-related system architectural design; safety-related system hardware realisation; safety-related system software realisation; human factors safety engineering.
Annex D: Example safety competence criteriaESC
Annex D sets out Task-based competencies and Supporting competencies….not intended to be a cookbook with ready-made recipes!
Provides examples for developing your own competence criteria; Key issue is the competence criteria you develop is for the specific
Activity; In the first instance focus on developing Competence Criteria for
the specific activity (no competence level). The adoption of the three Levels of Competence may be
advantageous when there are many identical Activities within an organisation.
Annex D: Example safety competence criteriaESC
Tread with caution when using Annex D:
25
Concluding CommentsESC
There is a drive towards more formal competence requirements ….traceability is a key issue.
There is no agreed international scheme for CMS or competence criteria for functional safety.
Competence has to addressed at organisational level and personal level.
Supply chain issue very important and challenging!
Subcontractor issue very important and challenging!
The IET Code of Practice is provides useful guidance but don’t use it as a cook book!
Useful Links
IET Code of Practice: Competence for Safety-Related System Practitioners
https://www.theiet.org/resources/standards/competence-cop.cfm
Managing competence for safety related systems. Part 1: Key guidance
https://www.theiet.org/factfiles/msc/man-comp1-page.cfm
Managing competence for safety related systems. Part 2: Supplementary material
https://www.theiet.org/factfiles/msc/man-comp2-page.cfm
ESC
Recommended